Search for: "State v. Phillips" Results 301 - 320 of 2,619
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Oct 2021, 5:06 am by dferriero
Ford Presidential LibraryKristin Phillips, Public Affairs Specialist, the Gerald R. [read post]
Ga.)); Bring a complaint in California federal court along with Attorneys General from six states (claims made by five states based on pendent jurisdiction dismissed in FTC v. v. [read post]
28 Sep 2021, 4:15 am by INFORRM
Summerfield Browne Limited v Phillip James Waymouth [2021] EWHC 85 (QB) This case, which can be read in full here, was the first case in which an order under section 13 was made. [read post]
24 Sep 2021, 6:55 am by Unreported Opinions
Criminal procedure — Motion for mistrial — Juror’s potential bias A jury in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City convicted Deon Phillips, appellant, of theft and possession of a regulated firearm by a disqualified person. [read post]
12 Sep 2021, 3:10 am by Annsley Merelle Ward
  On this third point, Mr Justice Birss (as he then was) provided an explanation as to the German injunction gap and the interaction with UK patent proceedings at [14]-[19] of his decision, summarizing previous decisions (HTC v Apple, ZTE, v Ericsson, Garmin v Phillips) where Mr Justice Arnold (as he then was) consistently expressed the view that the presence of a possible German injunction gap "was a factor to take into account". [read post]
22 Jul 2021, 6:55 am by Stewart Baker, Bryce Klehm
In the words of the Justice Department’s Criminal Resource Manual, in order to find someone guilty of violating the RICO statute under the “more expansive view” of U.S. v. [read post]
14 Jul 2021, 6:34 am by Unreported Opinions
Criminal procedure — Sentence modification — Justice Reinvestment Act On March 26, 2010, in the Circuit Court for Charles County, Delante Phillip Gray, appellant, pleaded guilty pursuant to a binding guilty plea agreement to distribution of a controlled dangerous substance (“CDS”) and admitted to violations of probation in two other cases. [read post]
7 Jul 2021, 9:52 am by Phil Dixon
Judges Inman and Griffin concurred. (1) Victim’s statements regarding identity of attacker were admissible as excited utterances despite possible passage of time between attack and statements; (2) Sixth Amendment confrontation argument not raised during trial was waived on appeal notwithstanding pretrial motion; (3) No abuse of discretion or prejudicial error in admission of testimony identifying defendant on a jail phone call and interpreting the contents of the call State… [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 9:30 pm by Karen Tani
  Arkansas Law Review Examines the Lessons of Korematsu v. [read post]